Across the legacy media Sunday dial, there was just one mention of the explosive declassification and publication of documents related to the Russia Hoax by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Rest assured, it wasn’t a bipartisan panel segment or an interview with Gabbard- but CBS’s Margaret Brennan bringing on the ranking House Intel Democrat in order to firefight the release and subsequent actions.
Click “expand” to view the transcript of the aforementioned exchange between Brennan and Rep. Jim Hines (D-CT)
WATCH: The only legacy media Sunday show mention of ODNI Tulsi Gabbard's Russia Hoax declassification and document drop- Margaret Brennan trying to firefight it with the help of ranking House Intel Dem Jim Himes (CT). pic.twitter.com/Q7cKZYNAOG
— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 20, 2025
MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman, I want to pick up on that topic. Just a statement of fact here: A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation found that the US intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election was correct. They deemed it to be so on a bipartisan basis. I'm saying that because today and yesterday, the director of the intelligence community, Tulsi Gabbard, has said that she is referring for prosecution former American officials she accused of treasonous conspiracy, a years-long coup against President Trump, because they assessed Russia had tried to influence the election. This is weeks after the CIA Director issued a report critiquing the tradecraft that went into that 2016 assessment. Is there any legal basis for any kind of prosecution here?
HIMES: None, absolutely none. Margaret, what you saw from the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was not just a lie, but a very dangerous lie, because when you start throwing around language like sedition and treason, somebody is going to get hurt. Now, you pointed out that the Senate committee, then led by Marco Rubio, a Republican and now Secretary of State, found unanimously that Russia meddled in the election to try to assist Donald Trump. John Durham, special counsel appointed by Donald Trump, investigated this, found that the Senate report was correct. Now, what Tulsi is doing it's a little sleight of hand, but it's worth focusing on. She is saying that the Intelligence Committee, early on, said that the Russians could not use cyber tools to mess with the voting infrastructure, the machines that tally our votes. And that was true then, and it is true now, though the Russians tried to break into a couple of states’, you know, election technical infrastructure. They didn't do it, but it is well known and well established that the Russians hacked into the DNC and undertook any number of other influence operations, including buying reams of Facebook ads to discredit Hillary Clinton. That is not in contention, right? And what is horrifying about this whole lie out of Gabbard is, number one, it puts people at risk. And right now, you know, the mouth-breathers on MAGA online are just going out of their minds based on a lie. And number two, the intelligence community is full of very, good people who do their jobs every single day, and now they're watching their leader do something that each and every one of them knows is dishonest and it is a really, really bad thing for the safety and security of the American people when that dynamic is- is out there.
BRENNAN: That Senate report is online, the findings are there, but I understand your distinction there, and it's an important one in influence versus physical hacking. You're--
HIMES: -- By- by the way Margaret, if I may- if I may, you asked about the referral. Here's the test. This is Epstein all over again. Criminal referrals. We're going to prosecute Barack Obama, you know, treasonous and seditious. Here's the thing, and I hope that 4, 5, 6, weeks from now- don't take it from this Democrat. 4,5,6, weeks from now, let's see if this administration, Tulsi Gabbard, accusing a former president of treason. Let's see if they bring charges. They won't. They won't, because there's not a judge in the land, not a single judge who will treat this with anything other than laughter that will be heard from the Atlantic to the Pacific in this country. So the test of this is 4,5,6 weeks from now, is the DOJ bringing charges? And the answer to that is no. And now we're going to be in Epstein world. We're like, wait a minute, treasonous conspiracy by a former president. Why isn't the Department of Justice bringing charges? And the answer to that question is that it is a lie.
The issue, of course, was never whether Russia may or may not have tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 election, but whether they colluded with then-candidate Donald Trump in order to do so (the Mueller Report found no evidence of such collusion). This collusive myth was the basis of the Steele Dossier, which undergirded the Russia Hoax that torpedoed the peaceful transition of power. ODNI Gabbard’s document drop confirms that subversion and establishes that it came from the very top.
This is what Brennan and Himes are firefighting here. Brennan does her part by playing it straight as she Adam Schiff’s House Intel successor try to redirect attention away from the findings and onto a narrow prosecution of former President Barack Obama. In order to facilitate this, Brennan reported on none of the substance of the doc drop. Nor did she report on the other news made by Gabbard: that there are whistleblowers that have come forward:
DNI Tulsi Gabbard: "I will do all that I can, and...we have whistleblowers actually, Maria, coming forward now after we released these documented because there were people who were around-who were working within the intelligence community at this time who were so disgusted by… pic.twitter.com/zjCuNeeA3D
— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 20, 2025
Himes, with Brennan’s assent, ends this portion of their interview by laying what will probably be the media’s frame going forward: mockery of a hypothetical prosecution of Obama under charges of treason within an artificially narrow timeframe (“4,5,6 weeks”). In fact, this is a broad conspiracy with many players involved who will not have the privilege of attempting to cite presidential immunity (“official acts”) as a defense. Brennan and Himes know this, as do the media.
Expect much more such firefighting in the coming days, as the media scramble to circle the wagons around the regime they served.
Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, July 20th, 2025:
MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Jim Himes. He joins us from Connecticut. Good morning to you. Congressman, you are on the Financial Services Committee, so let's pick up right there. The Supreme Court indicated that the President of the United States does not have the authority to fire the Fed Chair unless there is cause. It sounds like the White House is trying to build a case that they have cause. If they go ahead with it, what happens?
JIM HIMES: Yeah, well, you know, Margaret, the last question you asked the Secretary, shows what a con man he is. And I just listened to his whole thing. And, you know, if you're over the age of five, you've dealt with hucksters and con men. Everything is going to be great in two weeks. By August 1st, we're going to have a deal. The American people are going to be so happy. Complete failure to understand the facts, right? He said that tariffs are paid by foreign countries. Tariffs are not paid by foreign countries. He said, Jay Powell is torturing the American people. Margaret, you didn't have the time, but if you'd had a minute, you would have said, wait a minute. There's a Federal Open Market Committee that is comprised of seven Fed governors, and all of the heads of the central bank offices around the country. That committee, comprised of people who have been appointed by Democratic and Republican Presidents, set the interest rates, right? So, this notion that Jay Powell is unilaterally stopping a decline in interest rates, which, by the way, in the of- in the face- for those of those folks who know a little bit about economics, in the face of up-ticking inflation, which we're seeing, would be absolutely bananas. So, what you just saw was a master class by a huckster and a con man who uses words like torture that are very, very dangerous words, not just for the economy, but for the physical safety of people like Jay Powell.
BRENNAN: Well, just to be clear, that's why I said it's not the Chairman's unilateral decision for exactly the reason you raised, that there is a committee that makes the decision. The inflation rate for the CPI was 2.7% if you strip out food- energy and food, which is more volatile, it's up two-tenths of a percent. So, that economic data is what we are pointing to there, not opinion on pricing. But, is there congressional pushback that can be done? I mean, what happens if there's a tweet that says the Fed chair is gone?
HIMES: Well, interestingly, inside the White House, and I don't know who it is, my guess is it's maybe the Treasury Secretary is saying, and this is a very difficult thing to say to a person like Donald Trump, that if you fire the Fed chair, either illegally, which they're happy to do, or because you trump up some baloney-like-charge associated with a renovation of the headquarters, there is going to be a massive market reaction, because you cannot lie to the capital markets. We saw this the day after Liberation Day, before we all were familiarized with the TACO trade. The day after liberation day, the stock and the bond markets took a nosedive. So, my guess is that somebody is saying to the president because he doesn't care if he follows the law or not, and the law is very clear that he can't fire the Fed chair. But somebody is saying to the President, the economic instability that gets caused when the cornerstone of the global economy and capital markets all of the sudden has a politically driven interest rate policy. I think that's the one thing that's holding them off.
BRENNAN: Congressman, we're going to take a quick break and continue our conversation on a variety of topics. We need to bring up with you on the other side of it, stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We are continuing our conversation now with Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes, who is the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee. Congressman, I want to pick up on that topic. Just a statement of fact here: A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation found that the US intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election was correct. They deemed it to be so on a bipartisan basis. I'm saying that because today and yesterday, the director of the intelligence community, Tulsi Gabbard, has said that she is referring for prosecution former American officials she accused of treasonous conspiracy, a years-long coup against President Trump, because they assessed Russia had tried to influence the election. This is weeks after the CIA Director issued a report critiquing the tradecraft that went into that 2016 assessment. Is there any legal basis for any kind of prosecution here?
HIMES: None, absolutely none. Margaret, what you saw from the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was not just a lie, but a very dangerous lie, because when you start throwing around language like sedition and treason, somebody is going to get hurt. Now, you pointed out that the Senate committee, then led by Marco Rubio, a Republican and now Secretary of State, found unanimously that Russia meddled in the election to try to assist Donald Trump. John Durham, special counsel appointed by Donald Trump, investigated this, found that the Senate report was correct. Now, what Tulsi is doing it's a little sleight of hand, but it's worth focusing on. She is saying that the Intelligence Committee, early on, said that the Russians could not use cyber tools to mess with the voting infrastructure, the machines that tally our votes. And that was true then, and it is true now, though the Russians tried to break into a couple of states’, you know, election technical infrastructure. They didn't do it, but it is well known and well established that the Russians hacked into the DNC and undertook any number of other influence operations, including buying reams of Facebook ads to discredit Hillary Clinton. That is not in contention, right? And what is horrifying about this whole lie out of Gabbard is, number one, it puts people at risk. And right now, you know, the mouth-breathers on MAGA online are just going out of their minds based on a lie. And number two, the intelligence community is full of very, good people who do their jobs every single day, and now they're watching their leader do something that each and every one of them knows is dishonest and it is a really, really bad thing for the safety and security of the American people when that dynamic is- is out there.
BRENNAN: That Senate report is online, the findings are there, but I understand your distinction there, and it's an important one in influence versus physical hacking. You're--
HIMES: -- By- by the way Margaret, if I may- if I may, you asked about the referral. Here's the test. This is Epstein all over again. Criminal referrals. We're going to prosecute Barack Obama, you know, treasonous and seditious. Here's the thing, and I hope that 4, 5, 6, weeks from now- don't take it from this Democrat. 4,5,6, weeks from now, let's see if this administration, Tulsi Gabbard, accusing a former president of treason. Let's see if they bring charges. They won't. They won't, because there's not a judge in the land, not a single judge who will treat this with anything other than laughter that will be heard from the Atlantic to the Pacific in this country. So the test of this is 4,5,6 weeks from now, is the DOJ bringing charges? And the answer to that is no. And now we're going to be in Epstein world. We're like, wait a minute, treasonous conspiracy by a former president. Why isn't the Department of Justice bringing charges? And the answer to that question is that it is a lie.
BRENNAN: Understood. On the other topic, I want to ask you about as a Democrat, the New York Times-- the DNC-- is reporting the DNC examination of what went wrong in the last election is going to steer clear of the decisions made by the Biden turned Harris campaign. You were very direct early on in calling for then President Biden to drop out of this race. You don't parse your words normally. Do you actually think it is possible for your party to self-diagnose problems without looking at the presidential race itself in terms of the candidates?
HIMES: Look, we need to acknowledge and every- and all of America saw it on the night of that disastrous debate in the July before the election that Joe Biden was not going to win the election. That was not just evident in the debate. It was evident in the polling that his people were keeping from him. Okay, so that is a fact. Now, Democrats are a big tent party. We go from Joe Manchin, who's practically a Republican, to AOC who is a Democratic socialist. So, we always have a struggle in coming up with sort of one set of policies, one set of messaging, and it's particularly hard to do when we don't have a presidential candidate. You know, a presidential candidate, of course, attracts the attention, is sort of the one person who must run nationwide and speak for the party as a whole. Right now, we're having a lot of conversations with a lot of different views, and I understand that's enormously frustrating to Democrats who are so upset over the result of the election. But you know, other than fight back with the tools that we have right now, we've got to be introspective about what we have done wrong that resulted in a dramatic win by Donald Trump in 2020*. There's an awful lot of rage in the Democratic Party, and my message to my Democratic friends is fine. I get the rage, believe me. I was in the chamber on January 6, 2021, and worried for my own life. But the thing to do right now is to be introspective and ask yourself, what can we do better to appeal to more people, including those people that we have lost time and time again in elections.
BRENNAN: 15 months out from the midterm races. Congressman Jim Himes, thank you. We'll be right back.